Newsgroups: comp.arch
Path: utzoo!henry
From: henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Slandering Intel
Message-ID: <1989Jun4.072235.14408@utzoo.uucp>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
References: <182@mipos3.intel.com> <1989Jun2.163144.5197@utzoo.uucp> <4392@ficc.uu.net> <20993@winchester.mips.COM>
Date: Sun, 4 Jun 89 07:22:35 GMT

In article <20993@winchester.mips.COM> mash@mips.COM (John Mashey) writes:
>... Although I often agree with Henry, the negative
>comments on the Intel designers were: a) uncalled-for (OPINION), and
>b) untrue (DATA to support this follows)

Data: 

My negative comments were all (that I recall) either a) accompanied by
":-)" or b) addressed specifically to their judgement about what project
to work for at the time rather than their competence.

Opinion:

It seems clear to me that although Intel made several major mistakes in the
original x86 architecture, and has made occasional lesser ones in the
various implementations, most of the people involved in the implementations
were (unfortunately) very good.  The x86 wouldn't be half the pain it is
if the implementation end hadn't been carried through so well.  (Of note,
in particular, is the reputed decision of the IBM PC's original [non-IBM]
designers to use the Intel CPU simply because Intel was delivering good
silicon at a time when nobody else was.)
-- 
You *can* understand sendmail, |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
but it's not worth it. -Collyer| uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu